Well, I took about 10% out of the VE below 4000. Car still bogs but maybe slightly less. I think 30% is probably the right #. I'll try another 10% for now. Race is this weekend, I don't want to do too much without another dyno run.
I think I need to take a lot out of my idle VE as well since it's definitely choking itself to a stall.
It looks like Lou and I are running different versions of the A1 xdf. He's using the v5 version, and I'm using the standard version. Looking at the screenshot Lou provided, it seems the tables are named differently. Hence the confusion.
Anyway, let's hope he gets the fueling sorted out, so he can get his engine running to full capacity.
It looks like Lou and I are running different versions of the A1 xdf. He's using the v5 version, and I'm using the standard version. Looking at the screenshot Lou provided, it seems the tables are named differently. Hence the confusion.
quote
Might be a good time to download the latest version?
Well, I took about 10% out of the VE below 4000. Car still bogs but maybe slightly less. I think 30% is probably the right #. I'll try another 10% for now. Race is this weekend, I don't want to do too much without another dyno run.
I think I need to take a lot out of my idle VE as well since it's definitely choking itself to a stall.
Good grief... Get an Ostrich and tune on the fly. Get a *REAL* dyno tune. Making one change "offline" and then waiting weeks to go back to the dyno is ridiculous.
The gearhead one looks more like the one I downloaded from TunerPro.net...but still slightly different.
Blacktree's table names are similar but different and his file doesn't have it sectioned off like the TunerPro and Gearhead ones do.
I only have 2 or maybe [weather-permitting] 3 events left. Then it's 8 months of down time to work on tuning. I still need to get the frame checked out better because I can't open the passenger door easily since the hit I took last September...the body shop I used was apparently incompetent and never tried opening my passenger door... They also didn't install my new left driver's side suspension correctly since I keep hearing an inconsistent snapping noise as I drive...
I made some tuning changes based on the advice from the last 2 pages. The car is definitely running much better. I raced today. I didn't bog down. Lost in the second round to a black 80's Camaro. It gave the eventual winner (Al's LT1 Camaro) his best race. In the finals it was the driver of the black Camaro's brother in a late 70's silver twin turbo V8 in 2nd place. Hopefully there will be youtube videos posted in the next couple of days. I'll be looking forward to seeing them...and even more so to Shaun's multiple account trolling comments to them.
I want to get another dyno to see what's left to tweak. Thanks to the base pulse width adjustments I actually idle pretty good now...
Agreed on the value of SFI, but where did you get your math from? 312HP, at the wheels even, doesn't equate to 26HP each... its ~39HP, which equates to ~236HP at the wheels... did I miss something?
whoops, must have fat fingered it and not noticed!
Nice job Lou, I wish the guy at the shop I had my test performed at knew how to setup his printer or better yet even cared enough to setup the color fonts to produce a nice printout. I see your test was done in 4th gear. When I asked regarding why mine was done in 3rd I was told 4th would be too hard on the motor although 4th is much closer to 1:1 at .95 than 3rd at 1.32 and it also pulls cleaner.
Nice job Lou, I wish the guy at the shop I had my test performed at knew how to setup his printer or better yet even cared enough to setup the color fonts to produce a nice printout. I see your test was done in 4th gear. When I asked regarding why mine was done in 3rd I was told 4th would be too hard on the motor although 4th is much closer to 1:1 at .95 than 3rd at 1.32 and it also pulls cleaner.
Thanks Joseph.
It looks like I did a good job leveling off my a/f ratio by playing with the VE tables but the change in base pulse width still left me lean over all. This should be simple to correct. Still getting initially rich when the pedal is mashed but not as bad as before.
Nice job Lou, I wish the guy at the shop I had my test performed at knew how to setup his printer or better yet even cared enough to setup the color fonts to produce a nice printout. I see your test was done in 4th gear. When I asked regarding why mine was done in 3rd I was told 4th would be too hard on the motor although 4th is much closer to 1:1 at .95 than 3rd at 1.32 and it also pulls cleaner.
For a transverse transmission, there's nothing magic about a 1:1 ratio. That only applies to longitudinal RWD transmissions in which the 1:1 gear is "direct"--locking the input shaft directly to the output shaft--rather than through a gear mesh.
Originally posted by Will: For a transverse transmission, there's nothing magic about a 1:1 ratio. That only applies to longitudinal RWD transmissions in which the 1:1 gear is "direct"--locking the input shaft directly to the output shaft--rather than through a gear mesh.
Understood Will but for some reason my car pulls harder, smoother in 4th on the road. Not sure why 3rd didn't exceed 14 psi on the dyno when it does on the road.
That doesn't have anything to do with 4th being close to 1:1. I was referring to the desire to dyno at 1:1 gear ratio because it's "most efficient". That doesn't apply to transverse transaxles, only longitudinal transmissions, as noted above.
How do the road and dyno acceleration rates compare? That can affect how much boost a turbo is able to produce while the engine is trying to accelerate out from under it.
[This message has been edited by Will (edited 08-23-2013).]
Originally posted by Will: That doesn't have anything to do with 4th being close to 1:1. I was referring to the desire to dyno at 1:1 gear ratio because it's "most efficient". That doesn't apply to transverse transaxles, only longitudinal transmissions, as noted above.
How do the road and dyno acceleration rates compare? That can affect how much boost a turbo is able to produce while the engine is trying to accelerate out from under it.
Sorry for my "clutter" Lou, but that's what I'm getting at Will, I believe my turbine size needs a 4th gear pull instead of third for a better representation under boost aside from enrichment corrections. Also 4 th has less leverage which will load up the motor earlier.
[This message has been edited by Joseph Upson (edited 08-23-2013).]
argh!!! Track was rained out today. I added 5% VE up to 4000 and a little more from 4400 and up...also leveled off some timing inconsistencies... Looks like I have 5 weeks to try to get another dyno in. I'm looking to get my peak power back past 4600 rpm...
After the last race, I'll have 7 months to play with timing...
I've been reading up on the AE vs. TPS table and it seems that this table is what controls "tip in". Aka my initial rich condition when I go from 20% throttle to WOT. I believe I want to lower the numbers. Any other insights are appreciated.
I went to the same shop that did my dyno on page 3 with the old Fiero intake setup. They had a dyno day on Saturday. I tweaked my tune since the last dyno to not be so lean and I have my a/f ratio down to ~13.9:1 now with a peak ~5000rpm. Peaks were 166/201. This is a Mustang dyno. I asked if he changed any parameters since my dyno from 3 or 4 years ago and he said he used the same settings. Could the TPI "supercharger-effect" be true? http://www.fierofocus.com/T...old_and_fucntion.pdf Madness. Makes me want to do the DAWG mod to my old intake and slap that back on... Everyone claims this dyno is lower reading than the one I've been using recently...I just wanted to see how much headway I've made with my a/f ratio. I should be in mid-to-upper 170's now on the dynojet. Don't know when I'll get there again. Last race is this coming Sunday.
[This message has been edited by lou_dias (edited 10-07-2013).]
13.9 is probably a little too lean even for naturally aspirated, it's a range, some motors like it and some don't. I'd aim for 13.2 tops unless you've had benefits from it in the past. Something as simple as the straps being tighter on the rear end holding the car down, pulling it down further can make a difference in the results especially if your car is lowered already and the inboard axle angle is increased further towards the binding threshold that has caused some of our cars to shake/wobble on acceleration.
I recently read a hot rod magazine that had an article where they were track tuning a car. They ended up making timing and fuel changes for the best times. After the fact they went to a dyno and found it was running richer than what's commonly used so they leaned it out. I couldn't figure this out since the richer it was the faster it was. Something to think about.
I recently read a hot rod magazine that had an article where they were track tuning a car. They ended up making timing and fuel changes for the best times. After the fact they went to a dyno and found it was running richer than what's commonly used so they leaned it out. I couldn't figure this out since the richer it was the faster it was. Something to think about.
For cams with lots of overlap, that may be true. Even on the old graph you can see the power go south with the A/F ratio past 3600 rpm...
What I was saying is that with my TPI intake, aka the Fiero intake ported and shortened, I made 187/249 @ 4100-4200 rpm. Changing to a larger V8 throttle body and Trueleo I lost almost 20% of my torque... For poops and giggles, I should get the DAWG intake neck mod and swap back and see what happens past 4200 rpm now... I mean, I've has nothing but problems since I ditched the Fiero intake but if that TPI effect is real ... well that would be something.
Originally posted by lou_dias: Changing to a larger V8 throttle body and Trueleo I lost almost 20% of my torque...
Intake velocity, you can have too much flow for your setup in the same manner that you can have too much turbine housing on a turbo requiring a very high rpm efficiency to make use of it. I ruined a perfectly good set of 350 heads by opening up the runners, it was a dramatic before and after hard lesson where all else the same on the motor it was lacking an awful lot of low end torque just like the experienced machinist warned me against before I did it.
I recently read a hot rod magazine that had an article where they were track tuning a car. They ended up making timing and fuel changes for the best times. After the fact they went to a dyno and found it was running richer than what's commonly used so they leaned it out. I couldn't figure this out since the richer it was the faster it was. Something to think about.
Cars tend to run leaner in the real world than on the dyno
As you can see, the hp peak is fairly flat between 4800 and 5200. A/F ratio doesn't go above 14.0. I've already tweaked the a/f ratio down from 4400+ but unless no more dynos for a while me thinks. this was on Oct 5th.
On a side note, with all the money you spent on dyno runs, you could probably have your own datalogging setup by now.
That would make too much sense. Besides, then I couldn't BS with all the other guys at the shops etc... Also, that wouldn't have helped me discover that the TPI effect was working well on my stock shortened and ported intake compared to my Trueleo set up. Now I need to find a shop to do the DAWG mod to see if I can get the top end to hit 5k+ rpm.
Like the comment about the guy you beat in the first video.
"Ha ha... isn't that the guy who did the donuts and everything..."
I also realized that I have been pronouncing your name wrong in my head.
Did you think the first letter was a capital i instead of a lower case L? In defense of the Lincoln/Mercury, it was his first time at the track and while his motor was strong, he was on street tires and had to warm them up.
The AWD Talon owner is a friend on Facebook. He is running over 30lbs of boost. He got T-boned by a 2nd gen Camaro with a twin turbo 350 in the semi-finals. The Camaro driver was disqualified for intentional contact. I was really looking forward to our race as we are about 1/2 a second apart and I had inside lane. His weakness is the corners... I shift into 2nd before the first turn so if I could have kept him to the outside, it would have been possible to be in his way enough to win. C'est la vie. It was a crazy day...the 80's Camaro who beat me in August lost half his rear axle. It went flying off the car still attached to a wheel. The 3000GT that always wins (when he doesn't break down) broke another transfer case as the launch...
Originally posted by lou_dias: That would make too much sense.
Hehe
The Dawg mod will help the intake breathe better. But I doubt it will shift the power band much, if at all. You should have a little bit more torque throughout the RPM range, though.
If you want to shift the power band to the right, you need a more aggressive camshaft. A little bit more lift and overlap should do the trick.
The Dawg mod will help the intake breathe better. But I doubt it will shift the power band much, if at all. You should have a little bit more torque throughout the RPM range, though.
If you want to shift the power band to the right, you need a more aggressive camshaft. A little bit more lift and overlap should do the trick.
For the length of the track, I don't need the power band much past 5000 rpm though. I simply run out of room before having to hit the brakes in 3rd gear. My formula is on the rocks. Maybe I'll build a 3.5L motor in the same manner. I also need to find me some 275/35-17's that have 100 treadwear. That should be the last piece to the puzzle. I'm running 40's right now...too tall. If I can find shorter tires that support the width I need, then I will need more RPM...
Looks like I bogged the launch unlike in the first 2 rounds...
Years ago I had an extra-thick front sway bar on one of my former Fieros. I want to say it was 1 1/8" thick...where as the one I'm running now looks more like 7/8". Does anyone know where I can get a thicker front sway bar?
[This message has been edited by lou_dias (edited 10-23-2013).]
No. For this race I switched back to the 255/40-16 BFG G-Force's in the back and moved my bigger wheels/tires to the front and it paid off on the back straight-away where I picked up speed since those wheels+tires have less diameter than the 275/40-17 Nittos I've been running.
It also helped with the bogging I have due to my super-rich tip-in issue with the tune. If you re-watch the first 2 rounds, I launched hard and had some torque-steer. I had no torque-steer what so ever on this round 3 launch.
My 275/35-17 Hoosier R4's would have been perfect but they enforce a 100 minimum treadwear rating for this event...
[This message has been edited by lou_dias (edited 10-24-2013).]
